The Manhattan federal judge who was booted from the “stop-and-frisk” cases by an appellate panel after it found her impartiality “ran afoul” of judicial ethics got slapped down again on Wednesday.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request by Judge Shira Scheindlin to address the panel’s stunning Oct. 31 decision to remove her from the cases.

“We conclude that Judge Scheindlin’s motion lacks a procedural basis,” the panel wrote. “The merits of the order of reassignment [were] not because of any judicial misconduct or ethical lapse on the part of Judge Scheindlin.”

“Rather we have simply concluded that the appearance of her impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” the panel added. “We therefore need not consider Judge Scheindlin’s argument that she ought to be afforded an opportunity to contest charges of judicial misconduct.”

But NYU law professor Burt Neuborne, a nationally known civil liberties lawyer who headed Scheindlin’s “Dream Team” of five lawyers, claimed there was a silver lining to the panel’s decision.

He said it clarifies that Scheindlin isn’t guilty of judicial misconduct in the panel’s eyes – which in his opinion makes it “highly unlikely” that the same panel will rule in the city’s favor on a higher-stakes motion to throw out the judge’s ruling against the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk.

“I think the city’s strategy of vacating the [stop-and-frisk] decision on … the basis that there was bias [by the judge] is now dead in the water,” he said.

If the Bloomberg administration succeeds on its motion before the end of the year, it would negate Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio’s pledge to drop the city’s pending appeal of Scheindlin’s rulings.

Scheindlin in August had ruled stop-and-frisk illegally targeted minorities, and ordered sweeping reforms, including appointment of an outside monitor to rein in the controversial crime-fighting tactic.

The city declined comment on questions about whether the ruling would help or hurt its motion to have the stop-and-frisk ruling tossed.

However, City Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo issued a statement saying, “The Second Circuit clearly explained how the judge’s comments compromised the appearance of impartiality and required reassignment to a different district judge. The court’s ruling removing Judge Scheindlin from the case was correct.”